Mailing List Archive

| The fact that the line hasn't been upgraded could imply that the CIX
| isn't of use to SL.

It could also say something about SMDS.

Sean.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CRL is at Mae-W, the NAP and Mae-east (to the best of my knowledge, as we peer
with them at those locs).

It is my understanding that Sprint wouldn't initiate peering with them for
one reason or another (I don't want to touch that issue). So CRL is using
the CIX soley to reach Sprint, as well as Sprint to reach CRL.

There are a few other NSPs that are in a similar boat with CIX/Sprint to
the best of my knowledge.

Rob
>
>
> [.keep in mind that it's been over 18 months since I was a CRL employee]
>
> Robert writes:
> >Wouldn't have anything to do with the fact that it is a major cross connect
> >between many providers and Sprint? CRL comes to mind.
>
> CRL is also at MAE-W and the NAP, I would presume peering with Sprint at
> those locations as well as at CIX. It might be useful to compare lists
> of who's at CIX and at MAE-W and PB-NAP and see who's CIX-only, but I
> doubt CRL would be on that list. I could be wrong, though...
>
>
> -george william herbert
> gherbert@crl.com
> Most Assuredly Not speaking for CRL
>

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

> ] > Or, possible some small providers buy a multi-megabit circuit from a
> ] > large provider who gives them transit. The small provider then connects
> ] > at a single NAP and picks up bilateral peering sessions with a bunch
> ] > of people there. The result is offloading traffic from their
> ] > "transit link", which stands a good chance of being priced as a
> ] > "burstable" link. (pay for what you use) That gives the small
> ] > provider an economic incentive to operate in this manner.
>
> ] Quite a few CIX members operate this way. The interesting question in my
> ] mind is whether the "big guys" (defaultless nets, for the purposes of this
> ] discussion) think that this represents unfair competition or not.
>
> We've a defaultless net, but I'm not sure that I'm considered a
> 'Big Guy'. Hell, we only route 1% of the internet, but maybe if I
> lost my aggregates I could be bigger ;)
>
> The hidden metric that davec above doesn't consider is latency.
>
> If I peer at a NAP, I forgo the latency my upstream 'multi-megabit
> circuit' incurs.

Hey, depends on your upstream provider and the NAP you're talking
about... for some "Large" providers and at least one NAP, the reverse
is true. =-)

davec

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -